In my opinion, I believe that “1917” was a mostly historically accurate movie of WW1 with its unusual military tactics, fashion attire, no man’s land, and the trenches. In the film, many of the military tactics that were used are unrealistic and far-fetched. An example of this was when the Allies went “over the top” of the trench and charged into no mans land. From the lessons, we know that when a charge occurs, there is artillery and machine gun support, but in the movie, there was no support when the charge happened. Without support, the allied soldiers would be gunned down in masses and thousands of lives would be wasted for no reason. Another historically unrealistic action that occurred in the movie was when the commander in charge sent …show more content…
This is because when we saw the main characters crossing no man’s land, we could see the horrible conditions of the land around them, full of craters, burning buildings, and barbed wire. There were even more details which included the deepness of the holes, the worn down soil, and the decaying corpses which made for no man's land to be similar to what it is like in real life. The other accurate depiction was with the trenches that were filmed in the movie. The conditions of the trenches in the allied areas looked hastily made and damp, while the German trenches looked a lot cleaner and stronger. This was accurate because in WW1, the Germans didn't plan for the trenches to be a temporary shelter like the allies, but a permanent fortress that they had to defend. This made for better materials to be used, like cement and wooden branches instead of normal wooden planks. The last thing that I liked about the trenches was the rat-infested areas in the trench. From the lessons, I learned that rats were a huge problem for soldiers in the First World War, as they would breed rampantly, producing hundreds of babies at